MaximumMadness Having grown up a 90's kid, I often find myself nostalgically looking back on the films and television of my youth with a bit of a sad yearning. The world of entertainment was quite a different beast back in those days, and sometimes it can be easy to lose historical perspective and dismiss the media of the era when comparing it to more modern releases. Back then, a simple high-concept premise, a few likable actors and some (at the time) cutting edge effects were all we needed to have a good time at the cinema. But as filmmaking continues to evolve, and audiences are no longer wowed by the things we once were, it's becoming easier and easier to look back on films of that era as quaint and inherently more flawed than we might remember. Thankfully, there are many releases that still hold up to this day to one extent or another.A prime example of this would be the 1996 disaster/action film "Twister", from producer/co-writer Michael Crichton and director Jan de Bont. It's one of those 90's flicks that actually is still quite good fun thanks to solid and visually exciting action, effects that hold up for the most part and excellent performances from the entire cast. While it might not be quite as great as we remember, it's still solid-enough popcorn entertainment, even over twenty years later.We follow a group of storm-chasers who are on a mission- they are tracking a system that will be capable of spawning several tornadoes, in hopes of studying the cyclones with an advanced piece of technology they have developed. If they can achieve their goal, it might help in the development of a more advanced storm warning system. However, there are some obstacles in their way... including an evil corporate- funded rival (Cary Elwes) and personal squabbles between the team leader Jo and former member Bill (Bill Paxton, Helen Hunt), a couple in the midst of a divorce. And as the storm becomes increasingly dangerous and more volatile, it will eventually lead to a harrowing and thrilling series of life-and-death decisions for our heroes.The main strengths of the film come down to the extreme likability of the cast and the thrilling beats of action and adventure that de Bont excels at crafting. Each and every member of the cast is pretty much perfect in their roles, archetypal and clichéd though the roles may be. In particular, our leads Paxton (rest in peace, good sir) and Hunt are both exceedingly fun to watch and have a great chemistry that makes you want to see them reconcile their differences. Elwes is also wonderfully slimy as an opportunistic villain that you'll just adore hating. And there's even a really fun early role from Philip Seymour Hoffman. If you have a good cast, you can forgive a lot, and the charm on display from just about every performer is part of what makes the film such an easy and breezy watch.Director Jan de Bont, perhaps best known as a cinematographer who transitioned to the role of director with the excellent "Speed" before slipping up with later duds like the sloppy "Speed 2" and the over-produced and under-scary remake of "The Haunting" does what he does best here, which is make thrilling action that will keep the audiences glued to their seats. Say what you want about the mixed quality of his overall work- the guy knows how to make some kick- butt scenes. His camera-work is smooth and slick, his sense of pacing is strong and he ratchets up the stakes with each passing moment during the films many tornado sequences. (Expertly realized with CGI that still holds up pretty well to this day thanks to Industrial Light & Magic.) He injects such a kinetic sense of fun into the proceedings that you can kinda forgive some of the flimsy characterization and old tropes on display. You'll certainly never be bored.Unfortunately, the script by Crichton and Anne-Marie Martin is where most of the problems with the film lay. Despite the duo crafting some fun characters and interesting set-pieces, there's just a bit too much reliance on the same-old, same-old. You've seen these characters before. You've seen these motivations before. And you've seen these types of situations before. It's a palette-swap of numerous other adventure films that have come before. Not bad by any means... but typical enough that most audiences familiar with basic story structure will be able to guess the twists and turns the story takes ahead of time, which can somewhat rob from the intended suspense of certain scenes. Thankfully, the inventive action and great performances are able to overcome the so-so screenplay and elevate it.In the end, looking back... "Twister" might not be quite the classic we initially thought it would be when it first came out. But it's certainly good fun and is near-ideal popcorn entertainment. And that's perfectly fine. Sometimes we need a good bit of the old "dumb fun", and this movie is sure to please anyone who wants a fast, enjoyable experience.I give it a pretty-good 7 out of 10.

Hitchcoc Come on! Yes, I know I'm taking it too seriously. Someone said something about expecting too much when it's all about the special effects and lots of exploding houses. That's fine if that's your thing. What I don't buy is that the people who made the film didn't bother to research how tornadoes behave. Did any of them have a clue what the things can do. For people to be holding on to something for dear life (literally) while one of these massive things comes through is so stupid I can't believe it. There is no more devastating natural event in a small space than a tornado. No person is going to withstand it by grabbing on to something as it goes by. Also, like the shark in Jaws, the tornadoes in this movie seem to be chasing after the main characters. They are low pressure pockets that create enormous winds. They have not motives in mind. But I guess if you don't really care if there is a semblance of reality, go for it. There were some good scenes during the storm chaser parts at the beginning, but that was eventually forgotten.

louielol I watch this film fairly often, as it's one of my wife's favorites. Actually, I have a soft spot for it too, as the final scene is filmed only 2 miles away from a good friend of mine (his silos can be seen in the background as the team approaches to rescue Bill & Jo). I enjoy this film as I would a fantasy film, as it has little connection with reality. Tractors, combines and even houses are transported through the air by the tornado, but the pickup truck driven by our intrepid scientists stays firmly on the ground. The script is full of holes and predictable clichés, but it is still entertaining enough with a few good lines and characters.

Carl (carlroose) Twister is a classic storm-related movie that is known for its special effects depicting the intensity and power of tornadoes. The main characters in the movie, Jo and Bill, are having your typical pre-divorce drama throughout the film. The cliché twist of this 1996 film is that the disasters they experience throughout the movie actually mend their relationship. Their passion for storm-chasing reunites them and Bill doesn't take long to forget about his less intense fiancée Melissa. The main goal of the characters in the film is to use their invention DOROTHY to release thousands of small sensors into a tornado passing by. The sensors will hopefully provide Bill and Jo and the rest of the world with much-needed information on these sudden natural disasters that can help with the creation of better storm warning systems. After much trial and error, the two finally successfully use DOROTHY and the movie comes to a close. This movie successfully allows us to take a glimpse into the lives of storm chasers by providing us with an accurate-enough view of monitoring equipment that news stations attach to vans to read pressure, temperature, wind speed, etc. The coolest part of the film is that the main instrument DOROTHY is actually based off the real- world instrument TOTO, which stands for Totable Tornado Observatory. TOTO is a barrel-shaped instrument similar to the copy in the film that was created in 1979 with the hopes that it would record valuable data on a tornado's structure. Unlike the movie, there was never a successful deployment of this device as it was knocked down by even the weakest tornados. The device was also used more successfully in measuring wind fronts from thunderstorms until its retirement in 1987. Safety issues deploying such a large device near active storms made the device illogical to use. The movie had some other faults that shouldn't be recreated in real life. It mentions that a green sky always indicates a tornado, but this isn't exactly the case. The two phenomena just go together often since green skies occur when light scatters through raindrops during extremely heavy storm events. The film also had quite a lot of tornados throughout, with each one the characters came across being bigger than the last. Tornado event don't typically occur like that, but instead happen all of a sudden and then tire out just as quickly after their path of destruction comes to an end. Overall, the film is mostly fun with a little true science here and there.